Video: Victor Muller Talks About The Spyker B6 Venator

I love my old boss. I’m so very pleased to see him looking happy and healthy after a hellish few years giving his life (and unfortunately failing) to resurrect Saab Automobile.

Spyker Cars took a new concept car to the Geneva Motor Show last month, the Spyker B6 Venator. I think it looks 100% A-grade HOT. Spyker say they’ll build it from 2014 and I wish them only the best of luck in getting themselves on their feet again. The B6 Venator looks like just the right car for the occasion, too.

In this 4 minute video, Victor Muller talks about the new car, revealing the inspiration behind it and his favourite design elements.

The press release says Victor did the design himself, as is the case with all Spykers. It’s the best resolved Spyker design so far, so hats off the VM. Personally, I think he probably gets some technical advice from someone somewhere. No-one’s got that big a bag of talents, have they?

The Artega had a bland exterior, and an interior that looked like a kit car. I’m sure that the chassis was good (few were ever built, so who’s to say), but the design lacked vision.

I think it goes to show that you need to have the full package to compete in the automotive world. Technical competence isn’t enough if it’s wrapped-up in an unattractive box. The Venator has “it”, the GT did not.

Dunno, guess it’s in the eye of the beholder. B6 looks like a pimped-out Artega to me. More worryingly, Spyker / Muller have made no disclaimer about the origins of the concept, and now bloggers are the ones pointing out that it’s a makeover. That could backfire and damage Spyker’s brand. It’s a risky PR route to take.

Bloggers are asking the question, for sure. Until someone who knows something comes out and says so, what we’ve got are two strikingly similar cars. Here’s the comparison:

Now, I don’t know whether these images are to scale, but what makes me suspicious are the wheelbase and the window behind the door. Chainging the greenhouse isn’t a cheap or easy exercise as it can effect the rigidity of the car.

But even if it is based on the Artega, what’s the problem? Artega are no longer in business and if Spyker have bought the rights to the basics of the car, that’s their business. As long as the car looks and performs well and Spyker make it their own (which they’ve certainly done on the inside as well as fantastic touches on the outside) then I don’t have a problem with it at all.

The problems I have with badge engineering are when companies don’t try to differentiate, when they don’t give a car an identity, presence or any real competence. Nobody knocks Lotus for having used Toyota engines because they tune them to their own specifications. Nobody knocks Pagani for using Mercedes engines for the same reason. I guess your argument is that Spyker ought to acknowledge the Venator’s originas as Lotus and Pagani do and there’s some merit in that.

Personally, though, whether the Venator is based on the Artega is neither here nor there for me. I guess it’s a point of curiosity and would be interesting to know one way or the other, but I simply don’t see it as ‘risky’. What’s more important to me is the quality of the materials, construction and driving experience. If Spyker get those right, nobody’s going to think about the car’s bones at all.

Fair points, but still it’s an image issue. When people are second guessing where the concept is coming from, they are questioning the credibility and the originality of the brand. Now, if Spyker have in fact bought the license to a defunct model, would it have been better PR to put it in their press release right off the bat? Instead of mere praise for the company’s aviation history and such? Or, after the rumour is out that it could be a heavy facelift and motoring press ring them up to ask about it, to put out a little more background info?

I don’t know, maybe their potential clients do not care? It seems as if Spyker would like us to believe they are dedicated supercar originals with a proud history, but it seems there isn’t all that much substance in that image. They bought the rights to the Spyker name and glorified their history, and are now selling repackaged goods from yesteryear. To the brand conscious that could come across like Muller has bought some old, cheap stuff and is looking to pass it on for some profit like any used car salesman.

Just saying. If I had a hundred grand to spend on a supercar, I wouldn’t be swayed by Spyker’s pitch yet. The bit in the video where Muller praises the feel of the knobs and the look of the taillights is a little embarassing. There are brands that possess the substance Spyker seems to aspire to on a make believe level.

Maybe there’s 100 people out there who want and and appreciate the car’s exclusivity (even a lot more than Saab’s!) who will throw off those wet blanket throwers. Some people seem to have a storhouse of wet blankets to try to throw on most anything. I’m been enthused with lots of details on Saabs similar to tail lights and switches. Maybe this Muller guy is a genuine enthusiast of unique cars with a lot of character. One guy’s favorite car is another guy’s load of rubbish. It’s fun to like a car for your own reasons. That applies to Saab owners! It’s a mainstay! ring-a-ding-ding by golly!

I think that Spyker’s unique selling proposition is based upon style, ownership experience, and exclusivity; not engineering.
Engineering is important, of course, but only to the extent that it’s well executed.

This type of car is like a Swiss watch. Almost nobody cares that most watches are made from common movements, or that most suits are made from similar cloth. What matters is the cut, the assembly, the details, and the way that the design carries itself.

After all, if all you want is performance, you can get that cheaper from Porsche, BMW, Audi, AMG, etc.

You may well be right. I’m just unsure what Spyker as a brand is supposed to symbolise. The whole aviation history thing and its influence on the current design? The interior is bling with retro cockpit cues, and the taillights resemble jet plane afterburners. Why do they do that, if Spyker never made jet planes? What’s the big idea here? Is there one? Oh well, maybe it’s just me and my peculiarities.

I think the side profiles have similarities but are way different in proportions.
Speaking of copy cats. A car turned in front of me yesterday at dusk and I though to myself “-That is one weird looking 9-3 SC?”. Driving closer you could read Hyundai i30 (2009-10).
So, I Googled Hyundai and look at their “new” creations…
Ever wondered how a Ford Mondeo and NG 9-5 wagon mix would be like?
Man, I’m really starting to hate this conglomerate. Can’t they come up with something original now that they have made all that money by ripping off other peoples ideas for sooo many years. PATHETIC!

First of all, it is very good to see Victor. I admire him for how hard he worked to save SAAB. He’s one of the world’s coolest and most dedicated car guys. All the best to him. The Venator oozes character.

Fantastic looking car, for so many reasons. It oozes Spyker from every pore.
The glass-house is very nice and the side profile is quite feminine in its proportions, as many Italians of yesteryear will attest, makes for a ‘stunning rear end’.

And speaking of exclusive things….the end of the Masters golf tournament yesterday was very entertaining. Congratulations to Adam Scott on being the first Aussie to win the green jacket! I hear this will be huge news down under.

Where is the funding coming from this time? Remember that Victor’s initial backer, Antonov, is under investigation by the Lithuanian authorities. Need to see it before I believe it. Muller reportedly lost close to a billion in the Saab adventure… Btw, IMO the Artega is one of the best designed compact rear-engined sportscars. The Venator has a strange-looking hump that may well irritate on the long run. I wish the Artega would have been produced as a Cayman instead of the really bland-looking car that carries the name.